10+ years Jungian functions researcher, will try to go for advanced level discussions

Hello TypologyCentral,

I'm a 10+ years Jungian functions & psyche researcher. I also research ancient systems & philosophies that are typology-related such as Kaballah, Merkabah mysticism, Tao, opposites, the 4/5 elements and such. And I am a recruitment consultant & staffing architect. Basically, typology is my life.

I would like to pitch new theories about the psyche here, crude theories which are "under construction", in an effort to try to push the borders of our mutual knowledge. However, it requires participants with a background of around 5+ years of hands-on pondering over functions for me to go all the way. I understand that not everybody will have that level. I hope to find at least 1 or 2 people to have advanced level discussions with, I call you to come out, I am willing to share a lot of information.

To start out, I will mingle a bit here on any typology-related subject. And will try to help correct common (or uncommon) misconceptions of the Jungian opposites model if I encounter them along the way, for the benefit of all who browse the internet. So this is my small contribution to this forum. I will stay very impersonal, will not reveal my identity, and will not talk about anything outside of the subject of typology.

I'm a 10+ years Jungian functions & psyche researcher. I also research ancient systems & philosophies that are typology-related such as Kaballah, Merkabah mysticism, Tao, opposites, the 4/5 elements and such. And I am a recruitment consultant & staffing architect. Basically, typology is my life.

I would like to pitch new theories about the psyche here, crude theories which are "under construction", in an effort to try to push the borders of our mutual knowledge. However, it requires participants with a background of around 5+ years of hands-on pondering over functions for me to go all the way. I understand that not everybody will have that level. I hope to find at least 1 or 2 people to have advanced level discussions with, I call you to come out, I am willing to share a lot of information.

To start out, I will mingle a bit here on any typology-related subject. And will try to help correct common (or uncommon) misconceptions of the Jungian opposites model if I encounter them along the way, for the benefit of all who browse the internet. So this is my small contribution to this forum. I will stay very impersonal, will not reveal my identity, and will not talk about anything outside of the subject of typology.

Kind regards,
Researcher

"Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
“Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

i hypothesize that inferiority of a function does not mean, that the function is inferior, but that what is inferior is the ability to apply the version (e/i), which is opposite to the version of the dominant function. for instance Fi does not imply inferior thinking, but an inferiority of the ability to extrovert thinking effectively (such as when grabbing for a phone book and bothering strange people with inquiries about work places), due to conflict that would usually conflict with the introversion of Fi. this means that Fi doms and Ti doms are very similar in their ability to introvert thinking and to be conscious of this thinking, however the Fi dominat type does not used Ti to live his life, to give a major theme to his life, he just explores it out of curiosity and as a tool, but when making choices, he will dismiss it in favor of Fi. meanwhile the Ti dominant type's ability to extrovert thinking is not inferior, so in his own time, he can decide to explore extroverted aspects of thinking. likewise the Fi dominant type can explore extroverted feeling under conditions that seem optimal to Fi criteria. in similar manner a preference for auxiliary Ne does not imply absence of Ni, it only limits Ni to what seems plausible or helpful from the Ne perspective, at any particular time, but it does imply an inability to introvert S fully, while Ne is being relied upon, except in the case of the auxiliary Ne, the preference for Ne is not constant and Ne can be discarded temporarily, in favor of allowing S to introvert itself more. in practice this means that introversion of Si occurs as constant artistic sensibility, because sensibility does never fully conflict with Ne, it can be modulated towards the need of Ne, Ne needs change and sensibilities are involved in vintage and decay as much as in cleanliness and orderliness of pure Si in the absence of Ne. but for these PiNe types Si does not occur as diligence and patience for detail oriented efforts, because Ne does almost always conflicts with this aspect.

i hypothesize that inferiority of a function does not mean, that the function is inferior, but that what is inferior is the ability to apply the version (e/i), which is opposite to the version of the dominant function. for instance Fi does not imply inferior thinking, but an inability to extrovert thinking effectively (such as when grabbing for a phone book and bothering strange people with inquiries about work places), due to conflict that would usually conflict with the introversion of Fi. this means that Fi doms and Ti doms are very similar in their ability to "use" Ti, however the Fi dominat type does not used Ti to live his life, to give a major theme to his life, he just explores it out of curiosity and as a tool. meanwhile the Ti dominant types ability to extrovert thinking is not inferior, so in his own time, he can decide to explore extroverted aspects of thinking. likewise the Fi dominant type can explore extroverted thinking under conditions that seem optimal to Fi criteria. in similar manner a preference for axillary Ne does not imply absence of Ni, it only limits Ni to what seems plausible or helpful from the Ne perspective, at any particular time, but it does imply an inability to introvert S fully while Ne is being relied upon, except in the case of the auxiliary Ne, the preference is not constant and Ne can be discarded temporary, in favor of allowing S to introvert itself more. in practice this means that introversion of Si occurs as constant artistic sensibility, because sensibility does never fully conflict with Ne, it can be modulated towards the need of Ne, Ne needs change and sensibilities are involved in vintage and decay as much as in cleanliness and orderliness of pure Si in the absence of Ne. but for these PiNe types Si does not occur as diligence and patience for detail oriented efforts, because Ne does almost always conflicts with this aspect.

what do you think?

Work on your English.

"Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
“Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

Welcome! Sounds very interesting @Researcher. I look forward to hearing your insights and clarifications. Are you strict in your adherence to Jung or do you like to use him as a platform to explore and develop new ideas?

There are quite a few of us that have been here for 5+ years regularly discussing JCF. Hopefully we have something of interest to offer in return.

INFP 4w5 so/sp

I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.
- Emily Bronte

i hypothesize that inferiority of a function does not mean, that the function is inferior, but that what is inferior is the ability to apply the version (e/i), which is opposite to the version of the dominant function. for instance Fi does not imply inferior thinking, but an inferiority of the ability to extrovert thinking effectively (such as when grabbing for a phone book and bothering strange people with inquiries about work places), due to conflict that would usually conflict with the introversion of Fi. this means that Fi doms and Ti doms are very similar in their ability to introvert thinking and to be conscious of this thinking, however the Fi dominat type does not used Ti to live his life, to give a major theme to his life, he just explores it out of curiosity and as a tool, but when making choices, he will dismiss it in favor of Fi. meanwhile the Ti dominant type's ability to extrovert thinking is not inferior, so in his own time, he can decide to explore extroverted aspects of thinking. likewise the Fi dominant type can explore extroverted feeling under conditions that seem optimal to Fi criteria. in similar manner a preference for auxiliary Ne does not imply absence of Ni, it only limits Ni to what seems plausible or helpful from the Ne perspective, at any particular time, but it does imply an inability to introvert S fully, while Ne is being relied upon, except in the case of the auxiliary Ne, the preference for Ne is not constant and Ne can be discarded temporarily, in favor of allowing S to introvert itself more. in practice this means that introversion of Si occurs as constant artistic sensibility, because sensibility does never fully conflict with Ne, it can be modulated towards the need of Ne, Ne needs change and sensibilities are involved in vintage and decay as much as in cleanliness and orderliness of pure Si in the absence of Ne. but for these PiNe types Si does not occur as diligence and patience for detail oriented efforts, because Ne does almost always conflicts with this aspect.

what do you think?

I see you are carrying around a lot of rationalities, maybe I can just lighten the burden a bit by saying this:
--
The functions dont actually exist. They are merely a choice of a few locations on the continious spectrum of all personality types. Do you have good imagination? Let me sketch a 3D geometric model for you. The functions are used like a GPS to navigate the entire spectrum of the globe. For example, you need to set a fixed north pole and south pole, enabling you to pinpoint locations on that globe. We could place north pole and south pole anywhere of course, but in that case nobody would know what our coordinates mean. First you have to define a few fixed locations, to be able to have a coordinate system. So we defined 8 functions to reach a certain consensus to 8 exact locations for them. This way we all can talk about the same location.
The functions are 8 fixed locations evenly spread over the globe, of which the surface of that globe represents the entire spectrum of personality. And some functions oppose each other 180 degrees on that globe. Ni vs Se. Si vs Ne. Ti vs Fe. Te vs Fi. These are called polar opposites for this reason.
We can pinpoint your location by putting those locations in order of which ones are closest to your location.
If you are INFP (just read your other post) then your location on the globe is closest to Fi and then second closest to Ne. Hence FiNe is your function order.
The closest function is called strong/dominant/primary and the functions that follow are called secondary/tertiary/etc or inferior/weak. Strong would just mean it is a strong match to your location, weak would just mean there is a weak match to your location.

If you are INFP (just read your other post) then your location on the globe is closest to Fi and then second closest to Ne. Hence FiNe is your function order.
The closest function is called strong/dominant/primary and the functions that follow are called secondary/tertiary/etc or inferior/weak. Strong would just mean it is a strong match to your location, weak would just mean there is a weak match to your location.

Jung's function stack for a Ti-dom with an N-aux was Ti-Ni-Se-Fe. Myers's stack was Ti-Ne-Se-Fe. It was Harold Grant who came up with the Ti-Ne-Si-Fe model, boldly carried forward by shining lights like Linda Berens.

Also, and again contrary to Myers, I think the characteristics that the MBTI J/P dimension taps into line up considerably better with Jung's descriptions of J-doms ("rational types") and P-doms ("irrational types") than with Jung's extraverted J-doms and introverted P-doms (on the one hand) and Jung's extraverted P-doms and introverted J-doms (on the other). Jung said that P-doms "find fulfilment in ... the flux of events" and are "attuned to the absolutely contingent," while J-doms seek to "coerce the untidiness and fortuitousness of life into a definite pattern." He said a J-dom tends to view a P-dom as "a hodge-podge of accidentals," while a P-dom "ripostes with an equally contemptuous opinion of his opposite number: he sees him as something only half alive, whose sole aim is to fasten the fetters of reason on everything living and strangle it with judgments."

So it seems to me that Jung, face to face with the kind of person who'd test INFP on the MBTI, would have said that he was dealing with an irrational type (therefore an N-dom) with Ni-Fi-Te-Se for a function stack.

Other posts of yours have made it sound like you're a believer in the "Jungian" functions, but here you're talking about an MBTI INFP having Fi as their dominant function and Ne as their auxiliary function — a very non-Jungian configuration.

In Jung's model the 3 opposite i/e functions minus the shadow/polar-opposite are next to any chosen function.
Example about a "pure type" of Te (Jung didn't do the 16 types, he did 8 pure types):
Fi is the polar opposite (the opposite, the suppressed, the inferior, of Te), so that leaves only Si+Ni+Ti as the introverted functions next to it (auxiliary).
Bascially, you can analyze within the mechanics of Jung's model (by reading chapter 10 of Psychological types over and over and over again) that Si+Ni+Ti are closer to Te than the other functions.
Thus, a pure type of exactly Te, will have Si+Ni+Ti in equal bits around it as "counter balancing functions". Thus you could say a function ordering of Te - Si/Ni/Ti, as this type is closest to Te and then closest to Si/Ni/Ti . The location of Te is in the middle/average of these 3 points (Si/Ni/Ti).
They are actually not counter balancing as in "healthy" but as in "this is the way the model is by definition", in Jung's model the even mix of Si+Ni+Ti is equal to pure Te. He called those 3, the auxiliary functions, they are around any main function by definition.

So in Jung's original function ordering it is always function 2+3+4 which are the opposite i/e-attitude of the first function.

The proof?
You need some older books and articles in the spirit of that time long ago, not easily accessible. But there is a bit here, the link goes to the section "Orientation_of_the_tertiary":Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This should convince you, since it says the exact same thing I just said, let me quote:
"There are several references in Jung's writing to the three remaining functions having an opposite attitudinal character. For example, in writing about introverts with thinking dominant...Jung commented that the counterbalancing functions have an extraverted character."

You have to understand that Jung had no idea that MBTI will be created later on, that they would stack 2 pure types together like they do in MBTI, call them function1 and 2 and then create some weird function ordering in which 3 and 4 are the total opposite.

The model I use myself is the first 2 functions only. (I would rather also see the typology world stop using the MBTI 4 letter code, such as INFP. and just call it FiNe. This would stop the J/P confusion. And it gets rid of the MBTI patent on the 4-letter code as well, which I personally needed for my daily business)

So I use the 2-function (FiNe/NeTi/.....) model personally. Which is just the combination of the pure Jungian types, of which it is closer to the first than the second (but could also be exactly in the middle of those 2, which I would write as a FiNe/NeFi-type).